Okay, it's entirely unrealistic. But even the great Daryl Morey didn't grow up thinking "I Want to Be the Next Red Auerbach" (then again, by the age of five he probably figured the odds were in his favor ). Let me give a brief description of my current situation: I'm a college graduate on a "career hiatus," trying to map things out and decide the next step in life. I spent nearly two years working part time as a bartender as well as interning for athletic teams and a couple other organizations. I could just as easily have stayed in Florida and remained a bartender indefinitely (like some friends), but you know what? I don't see the long-term value in that. I'm not trying to stay somewhere and hang out with a non-career job (like many of my friends). Basically, I want to be doing something that will help me "get there" in life. Ideally I would be working full-time within a valuable organization, but there's not much available at the moment. I have a positive outlook, which leads me to look at graduate school. Currently I'm studying for the GMAT, planning to do well (hopefully) when I take it in December. What Would Daryl Morey Do? That's a guy right there who was uber-intelligent, going from Northwestern to MIT. He had tons of intellectual research that landed him with the Celtics and the rest is history. Me? I took a handful of general business classes in undergrad and didn't understand a damn thing when I took my only mathematics course (Finite). I'm not saying I couldn't try to learn, but...what should I be looking to pursue for a graduate degree? Statistics? Calculus? Applied Statistics? Accounting? At the very least I'd like to put myself in a position down the road to find a high-level career in business and perhaps a mix of sports and technology (two major interests of mine). I think I'm capable and I'd hate not to try for something big. And money sure would be nice, wouldn't it?
Do an honest evaluation of yourself. What are your strengths? What do you enjoy doing? If those two match up, you have an easy decision. If they don't match up, you need to choose. If you really enjoy doing something, your passion may be able to carry you to success. Likewise, if you are really good at something, work at it until you are in the top 10% of people who do it. If you can get into the top 1%, even better. The rest is luck and connections - and I'm no expert at making connections. I can tell you that if you are really really good at something, some minor flaws will be forgiven or ignored.
Statistics is going to be hard, but I think that's a good place to start. If you're taking the GMAT, try get into a good quant based MBA (I heard Booth and Stern have a strong quant slant from some friends but I haven't start researching for real yet). Thinking about a MBA myself though I think I might have to retake the GMAT to get a more reasonable score (I heard schools start distinguishing you at 740 from rest of the pack). Even if you don't get to be the next Morey, using data to predict behaviors have uses in a ton of industries (medical, pharma, IB, consumer finance, insurance and etc.).
You sound exactly like me one year ago. Recent college graduate that wanted to work in college or professional sports. Bartending to pay the bills. Trying to figure out my next move......and so on. Bottom line: getting a job in sports is damn near impossible unless you know somebody. I was a D-1 athlete, had a media relations internship with my school with references from the fricken AD and what not -- couldn't even get an interview for a media relations job on any level in sports. Gave up on that. Now? I'm back in school studying air traffic control. It's a two-year program that I'll have done by June and hopefully hired by the FAA soon thereafter. It offers job security, job satisfaction (i'm a huge aviation nerd)....and it just so happens to be one of the top 15 highest paying jobs in America. Make your own luck in this world. Weigh all your options and make a practical choice that you can live with. Don't just target a hell job that pays well thinking the money will make you overlook everything. I know people that have tried that strategy and quickly got burned out.
Long story short: back in the early 80's there was a massive strike. Reagan fired everybody and new ATC'ers were hired. Now those guys are all approaching the FAA mandated retirement age so they are in the midst of a massive hiring surge over the next few years. The position is recession proof and pays well. Is it stressful? Absolutely, but definitely can be rewarding if it's the line of work you're looking to get into. But good luck with that. If you were from my area I would highly recommend the program I am currently enrolled in (top three in the nation).
Uhh...unless this is a typo, 740 on the GMAT is at the 97th%... I doubt schools start distinguishing people there since most aren't scoring in that range... if you are looking at a top 15 MBA program, make sure you score over a 700 and you'll be fine (assuming the rest of your app is up to par).
I actually spent a few minutes researching the ATC position. Yeah, pretty nice gig. My degree is in Sports Management, a seemingly "cool" degree that everyone gies into thinking they're going to be Drew Rosenhaus. It wasn't an awful degree, but clearly not as demanding or challenging as other degrees (like business). It did require business, but was, as I can best describe it, "business-lite." Not surprisingly many athletes were in these classes, so some courses were more lenient when it came to curves and grades. That meant I rarely had to put much effort in my work (which was more focused on group projects, mixed with a few papers and exams). I suppose one could say I short changed myself, but honestly undergrad wasn't going to determine my life (unless I intend to pursue a medical degree...which I'm not; blood, eww!). On top of this, I've realized most jobs in sports are incredibly menial or grossly underpaid. I see people working in college athletics in the same position or lightly promoted for 15+ years and they're not making $40,000. That frightens me, and many can argue it's certainly rewarding at the end -- once you get to an upper-level position in college or lower-professional athletics there is good compensation (~$80k-$120k). But that's a long commitment within the politics of an organization. The hours are relatively manic, though the day-to-day stress may actually be less than other positions. Plus, so many people like the idea of working in sports, these teams, leagues, schools or organizations are able to pay less for the "glamour" of working in sports. =========== Does this contradict my idea of tryng to put myself in a position to "be the next Morey?" Sure, you could argue that. However, these "analytical" jobs are eventually going to be in every professional team in sports. I still view the "Moneyball/Moreyball" as in its infancy, so why not try and put myself in a position to be viewed as a valuable commodity to such a department? ========= I gotta admit, I wouldn't be thinking of the GMAT (and thus an MBA or other Masters) if it wasn't for the influence of a friend. He recently took the test and did quite well on it -- 740. I'd be lucky to get a 700 and am more likely to get closer to 650 (which is still a good score), which is why I'm focusing more on looking for a Masters in accounting or statistics -- maybe not my passions, but perhaps I can combine one of them into something I am potentially capable at succeeding at -- like being the next Daryl Morey.
I scored 700 but if you look at the top 15 programs, that's either at or below some of the averages/medians. My GPA wasn't great (Electrical Engineering major that kinda try to wing the major, not a wingable major ) so if I need to be up to par overall, I think I probably need to improve it (didn't do as well on the Quant as I could, 2 weeks of cramming didn't work). I've also talked with a couple of more overachieving friends/colleagues, and they either scored at 740 or think that I should....
A 700 is not what it used to be. You need 730-740 for any of the better schools unless you started a non profit, company, etc. or at least lied about starting one.
He was chief resident of psychiatry at Mass. General for two years, and did his fellowship in psycholinguistics at MIT.
Don't get me wrong - I think you should score as high as you can on the GMAT. But what I'm saying is the difference between a 720 and 740 isn't going to be the deciding factor on whether or not you get into that top 15 MBA program. The GMAT is simply one component. Also, I just wanted to clarify that I don't think 740 is the starting point at which these programs begin to filter out students or separate them. I'm positive the bars starts at the lower end of 700, if not lower.
I agree. A 700 isn't what it used to be but to believe that only a 730 or 740 will get you into a top 15 MBA school is not the right way to go about it. The reason why MBAs are so much harder to get now versus 50 years ago is because now they are looking for substantial work experience (which also is a major determinant of what type of program you get into). Like the saying goes, a good GMAT score won't help you get in but a bad one will keep you out. All I'm saying is you don't need a 730 or 740 to get into Harvard or Stanford - there are other parts to your application.
I agree with that, a 700 will not shut the door. Notice in the original post I said believe you need a 740 to start distinguishing from the pack (GMAT scorewise). 700 is not going to be the reason someone didn't get into certain schools, but it's not going help either. I'm also surprised work experience count for that much since read an article on correlation between MBA success which found the highest correlation with GMAT while a lot of other factors (including work experience) are significantly less correlated .
